(DDM) – The Federal Government has spent more than ₦10 billion on insurance contracts covering public servants and government-owned assets since May 2023, raising renewed public attention on how risk management and asset protection are handled within Nigeria’s public sector.
The expenditure, which cuts across several ministries, departments, and agencies, reflects the government’s statutory obligation to insure public assets, personnel, and strategic infrastructure against unforeseen risks such as accidents, natural disasters, fire outbreaks, and other liabilities that could result in heavy financial losses.
Insurance coverage for government workers traditionally includes group life insurance, workplace accident policies, and other welfare-related schemes designed to provide compensation to families in the event of death or permanent disability while in service.
In addition to personnel-related insurance, the Federal Government also insures public buildings, vehicles, equipment, and critical national assets, particularly those with high replacement costs or strategic importance to national operations.
Officials familiar with the process explain that such insurance contracts are usually awarded through approved procurement procedures, often involving competitive bidding and oversight by relevant regulatory agencies to ensure compliance with public service rules.
The ₦10 billion figure represents cumulative payments made over time, rather than a single contract, as different government entities procure insurance services based on their operational needs and asset portfolios.
Historically, insurance of public assets has been a long-standing requirement under Nigerian law, aimed at protecting public funds from sudden shocks that could arise from disasters or accidents affecting government property.
Past administrations have maintained similar insurance arrangements, although the scale of expenditure often varies depending on economic conditions, asset expansion, and the number of workers covered within a given period.
Supporters of the policy argue that insuring government assets is a prudent financial decision, as the cost of replacing damaged infrastructure or compensating affected workers without insurance could far exceed premium payments.
They also note that effective insurance coverage can help stabilize public finances by preventing emergency spending when unexpected losses occur.
However, critics have consistently raised concerns about transparency, value for money, and the effectiveness of some insurance contracts awarded to private firms.
Civil society groups have, in previous years, questioned whether all insured assets were genuinely covered, and whether claims were promptly honored when incidents occurred.
There have also been calls for greater public disclosure of insurance beneficiaries, contract terms, and claims history, to ensure accountability and eliminate the risk of inflated premiums or underperformance by insurers.
In response to such concerns, government officials often emphasize that insurance contracts are subject to internal audits, external reviews, and regulatory supervision by bodies such as the National Insurance Commission.
They insist that proper documentation, verification of assets, and risk assessments are conducted before policies are approved, in line with existing financial regulations.
The current disclosure of insurance spending comes at a time of heightened public scrutiny over government expenditure, as Nigerians grapple with economic pressures, rising living costs, and demands for greater fiscal discipline.
Analysts note that while insurance spending itself is not unusual, transparency around how such funds are utilized is critical to maintaining public trust.
As discussions continue, stakeholders have urged the government to strengthen oversight mechanisms, publish detailed breakdowns of insurance contracts, and ensure that public interest remains central to all risk management decisions.
The debate highlights the broader challenge of balancing responsible asset protection with accountability in the management of public resources.